Facing the mirror: how authentic can the leader get

Situation One

Mohd Rashid, the new Operations Officer, was very impressed by the Safety first policy of the company, and was truly inspired by the lectures by the Manufacturing Head in his on- boarding program on the various initiatives taken to create safety awareness. During the Maintenance shutdown, he was vigilant and he worked meticulously to ensure that the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) were fully complied with. The date of commissioning, however, got delayed due to late despatch of an important equipment which was imported from Italy. The Maintenance department suggested that since the equipment still can take some time to arrive, and the market was going dry, the Operations department could easily start the production, and fix the equipment later by making do with the old discarded equipment. He refused, as it would violate the safety norms. Next day his boss overruled him and told him to start the operations as there was a request from the Manufacturing Head not to delay any more. Rashid was intrigued. Do the people say one thing and do another here?

Situation Two

That was the first time Robin Paul faced a trade union. Two of them came in and sat down without asking, followed by ten workmen, who kept standing at the back. One of the two, who sat, introduced himself as union secretary and the other as his deputy. He politely stated the problem of a supervisor favouring some workmen (belonging to the rival union) with overtime. Robin heard the complaint and responded by firmly saying that overtime work is the decision of the manager, a purely functional judgment, and that the decision of the Line Manager cannot be challenged. Besides, overtime is based on exigencies of work and cannot be claimed as a matter of right. His response stoked a fire and after much shouting and table thumping, the group marched into the cabin of his boss, the HR Manager. The HR Manager coolly handled the issue, and later on asked him what he had said. He explained. The boss counselled him that although what he said was correct, he should have told them that ‘he would look into the issue’. He was puzzled. What is wrong in being candid in the first place?

Is it possible for an individual to be real and authentic at work? Many years back when William Whyte wrote his ‘Organization Man’, he had sounded a warning: the rules of big organizations are different from the canons of virtue that individuals have learned at school. So traditional organizations encourage people to engage in what Chris Argyris described as ‘defensive routines’ ,  to accept that it is all right to say one thing( ‘espoused theory’ ) and to do something else( ‘theory in action’). ‘It continues to surprise me how many leaders attempt to be one way at work, while their “true” personality emerges outside of work. Once a CEO reminded me, “Leadership is acting.” And it surprises me when these same leaders seem shocked or confused when their employees don’t trust them, don’t like them, and can’t really wait to work elsewhere’ (Kevin Kruse. What is authentic leadership? https:// www.forbes.com>sites>kevinkruse)

Questions, however, kept coming up, since 1990s, when, in the wake of explosion of corporate scandals, and the fall of titans like Enron, Satyam and others, whether the utilitarian approach in organizations is sustainable. There were concerns raised about the role of leadership and the need to overhaul leadership completely. Bill George, the CEO of Medtronic , in his now influential books (‘Authentic Leadership: Rediscovering the Secrets to Creating Lasting Value’ and later ‘True North’) advocated the formulation of a new leadership style, which upholds and strongly values, qualities such as personal and professional integrity and a deep sense of commitment and dedication. The construct of Authentic Leadership evolved, based on four dimensions: self-awareness, balanced processing, relational transparency and internalized moral perspective. Research was conducted to explore the antecedents of authentic leadership behaviors, the mediators that make it effective, and the impact an authentic leadership style. Initial research has shown that leaders who practice authentic leadership normally lead teams that perform better than teams with leaders who do not practice authentic leadership. Now Authenticity has become the gold standard for leadership” (Harvard Business Review, January 2015).

Has the time really come for the authentic leader to take the reins? In the context of pressures to promote style over substance, dress for success, embrace flavour-of-the-month fads and fashions, and compromise one’s values to satisfy the stock market’s unquenchable thirst for immediate profits, the leadership challenge of metamorphosing into authentic leadership is formidable. Business organizations have, in the past ,routinely fostered cultures of duplicity and clothed them with elegant phrases like ‘organizational awareness’ (a competency) and ‘ambiguity tolerance’ (a competency), suddenly becoming value driven, knowing, showing, and remaining true to one’s real self at work is hard .

It has been also been argued that authentic leadership as an indication of a leader’s true self is impossible and, the model refuses to acknowledge the imperfections of individuals and can disrupt the way business needs to go on.

In the final analysis, however, the key question that should settle the issue would be around an aspirational workplace: should there be a progress towards trust, transparency and respect for individuals and should the leaders spearhead the transformation? It is worth hoping for?

To quote TS Elliot ‘We shall not cease from exploration/ and at the end of all our exploring/ will be to arrive where we started/and know the place for the first time (Four Quartets)